- From: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl>
- Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 10:36:49 +0100
- To: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>, www-webont-wg@w3.org
Frank van Harmelen wrote: > Two reasons for only partial compatability: > - syntactic: we're not sure if we can organise the XML syntax to "include" a/some/all of the RDF Schema serialisations. > - semantic: as you know, the RDF Schema model contains some oddities (classes as members of classes, etc). We might want to make the OWL meta-model simpler. Be careful here. The "oddity" of treating a class an an instance of another (meta)class is actually a representation requirement coming out of some of the use cases (e.g. "species" as metaclass of "mammal"). The flexible class/instance distinction is in fact the most powerful feature of RDF Schema (from my perspective). Guus -- A. Th. Schreiber, SWI, University of Amsterdam, Roetersstraat 15 NL-1018 WB Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Tel: +31 20 525 6793 Fax: +31 20 525 6896; E-mail: schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl WWW: http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/usr/Schreiber/home.html
Received on Friday, 4 January 2002 04:39:41 UTC